The tipping point of change in Anorexia Nervosa (AN): Qualitative findings from an online study

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to understand factors related to treatment and/or recovery from self-reported Anorexia Nervosa (AN), including ‘the tipping point of change’. An online questionnaire was developed and administered from December 2014 to December 2015 to individuals ≥18 years of age with AN in the past or currently who were recruited through eating disorder organizations in Australia and the United Kingdom. Responses to a specific qualitative question on ‘the tipping point of change’ were analyzed using conventional content analysis (CCA). One hundred sixty-one participants completed some or all of the questionnaire; only 67 women (41.61%) answered Question six on ‘the tipping point of change’, and analyses were restricted to data from these women. The themes identified were: 1) realizing the loss of something valuable, 2) the risk of losing something valuable, and 3) something to live for/stay well for. These results are important for health-care providers as they work with patients to identify life experiences, including ‘loss/potential loss’ and ‘the need for preservation’, that have personal significance. Some patients may realize that ‘enough is enough’; something needs to change. These intrinsic motivating factors may also be the impetus for eventual recovery for some individuals.

KEYWORDS:

• Anorexia Nervosa
• tipping point of change

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Professor Alan Bensoussan for sharing his knowledge and experience and providing guidance on the questionnaire design. The authors would like to thank The Butterfly Foundation and BEAT- Beat Eating Disorder for their help in recruitment for this project.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Sarah Fogarty

SF and LR participated in the design of the study and the questionnaire. SF was responsible for the recruitment of participants. SF performed the statistical analysis. SF and LR performed the qualitative analysis. SF wrote the first draft of the manuscript. LR and SF both made critical revisions to the paper. All authors contributed to and have approved the final manuscript.